d_fitz commented:

Sickofobama commented:

Charlie commented:

Interesting move. In terms of Cost-Benefit Analysis, I wonder what Rep Simpson thinks he will be gaining out of this. I know what he’ll be losing. I just can’t figure out what he’ll be gaining. Maybe someone has video of him drowning a puppy.

OWSCarl Nitwit Extraordinaire commented:

A pledge means nothing for the likes of a Simpson. The promised spending cuts always materialize, and that’s why there’s no need for a balance budget amendment. Our debt is only $15 trillion, and big government will eventually lead us to prosperity.

progressoverpeace commented:

Robert commented:

The Tea Party message to cut spending has been completely lost in Washington DC.

That’s Boehner’s doing, for the most part. He sucks. He’s the worst. He’s an idiot of monumental proportions. Many others in the GOP are certainly guilty of forgetting what they were voted in to do (the primary candidates don’t even talk about repealing ObamaCare any more, save Bachmann and Santorum), but if Boehner wasn’t the total POS coward and fool that he is (having totally screwed up every single “negotiation” with the White House and the dems up to this point) the GOP would not allow these other weak personalities, like this Simpson worm, to make a mockery of the support of the base, as they are.

I liked Boehner. He’s a fun guy, I’m sure – but he has no business being in political leadership. None. He’s a failure. We’ve known this since before he became the Weeper of the House, when he threatened a lot, but really did nothing to start ObamaCare from being shoved down our throats. He threatened to read the bills on the floor, but never read a single one!

Meh … It’s ugly, and it’s only going to get uglier. The worst threat to our nation ever, in the form of the Ineligible Retard from Indonesia and his America-hating dems … and we have the kiddie GOP in charge in the House. There’s a reason why men crying in public were generally looked down on and not given responsibilities … because it’s wimps like Boehner who are criers. Score another one for the common sense of tradition.

#1AMERIX+CAN commented:

Robert commented:

“Our conference is opposed to tax hikes, because we believe that tax hikes will hurt our economy and put Americans out of work.”

Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

Should be,

“Our conference is opposed to tax hikes, because we believe that the federal government is too big and intrusive, is hurting the economy, and is putting Americans out of work. The answer is, by cutting spending, to reduce the size and scope of the federal government to that outlined by the Constitution that we all swore to uphold, and allow states to handle problems for which we are not authorized under the law.”

Robert commented:

#11

“That’s Boehner’s doing, for the most part.”

He’s the so-called leader, sure. But each of the members, especially the new members elected as “Tea Party” candidates, has a responsibility to their own personal integrity, and they are all failing in my opinion.

And the nation is failing right along with them.

There is at least one thing they could do. They could each make proposals to cut spending, in a series of press releases if nothing else. These initiatives could be large, as in departmental cuts, or smaller, as in individual appropriations for programs, some of which are ridiculous in nature.

They could become a force to be reckoned with by exercising the voice of the people that elected them, not by playing along with big-government party politics.

Johnny "Stanford" Davis commented:

There’s a deficit, so of course we need to stop the deficit. Do you support big deficits, Jim? Also, there can be a compromise made to cut lots of spending, because many Democrats are against cutting spending. Of course people should vote on what is the best policy, and if a bill that includes higher taxes is part of the solution, vote for it. It’s not like taxes are high now. You may have forgotten that Reagan, Clinton and Bush cut taxes, so they are now at very low levels. In fact, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is its lowest in 60 years, so it NEEDS to be higher in order to cut the deficit, which Obama has been increasing.

Robert commented:

The problem with “compromise” is that there is no talk of cutting spending. All we have officially is some vague notion to cut the rate of increase in spending. There are no actual real spending cuts, except for the military, of course.